charliesmum: (Default)
[personal profile] charliesmum
The greatest thing about blogging is it combines the ego-centric whining of a diary with a support group. I love the fact that I can bitch about stupid things in my journal simply as an outlet for my feelings so I don't end up smacking my head into a wall, and still get people to, metaphorically speaking, pat me on the back and say 'there, there.'

You all rock. Thank you. Really, really thank you.

So. I get a call this morning on my cell phone. It is on 'restricted' so I think it is my really nice but slightly paranoid neighbor calling me, as she did the other day. Guess who it was.

Yep. It was crazy ex-babysitter. Who, by the way, came a trick-or-treating at my house with her son. I was polite and she didn't ask for any money, so all was well.

Guess what she's asking for? She wants a letter from me saying when she watched Charlie and why she had to stop as part of her slip-and-fall lawsuit.

I agreed to do it. I thought about it, and it is true, in a sense, that I ended her employment because of her 'accident'. She was dragging Charlie to court, and wasn't taking him anywhere in the summer because of her 'accident'. So I'm not lying. This is what I said:

To whom it concerns:

(Crazy Babysitter) acted as my son’s after-school caregiver from November 22, 2004 until July 22, 2005*. I was paying her $150.00 a week.

After (Crazy Babysitter) slipped and fell, she was unable to consistently care for my son, who is a ‘special needs’ child, and I eventually had to find other help.

So that is telling the truth, right. I didn't say 'she was so horribly injured she couldn't work. I'm just saying after she fell, she wasn't doing her job anymore. Any lawyer types out there want to let me know if I'm purjering myself. Is that the right word? I've no idea.

Hopefully she'll win tons of money and live happily ever after and I won't ever hear from her again.

*And again, thanks to LJ, I have the exact dates recorded. Go me.

on 2005-11-03 04:08 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
Oy. This woman's excuses to bother you are just neverending! I worry that you will never stop hearing from her as long as she gets something out of you.

So that is telling the truth, right. I didn't say 'she was so horribly injured she couldn't work. I'm just saying after she fell, she wasn't doing her job anymore.

You do say that she was "unable" to do her job, which implies that it's a result of the fall, rather than she just stopped doing her job, which could be chalked up to the accident, or could be chalked up to her being lazy. I guess it's a matter of what is your honest opinion of it.

But I'm definitely not a lawyer-type, so my opinion is strictly unprofessional!

on 2005-11-03 04:27 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
Meh. I hear what you're saying, but any judge worth a damn wouldn't give that letter any weight in court without added testimony. It says what it says and nothing more. Go, [ profile] charliesmum.

on 2005-11-03 04:37 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
The funny thing is, the woman in your icon looks a bit like Crazy Babysitter. :)

on 2005-11-03 04:35 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
I agree that you did the right thing by just putting down the facts and not expanding on anything. If you had added anything else, you would have just been opening a can of worms and making yourself a bigger part of her lawsuit than you really should have been.

Also? $150.00/week?! Yikes! She had it made!

on 2005-11-03 04:49 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
It seems to me that your letter is perfectly truthful, but I don't think the court will care about it in any case.

I'm told that unless a letter is notarized or witnessed it doesn't mean anything to the court. That may be state-specific, though, or maybe specific to the type of case.

on 2005-11-03 05:00 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
She did say something about getting it notarized but we don't have a notary here in the office and I'll be damned if I spend my day trying to find one.

on 2005-11-03 05:11 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
Really, if I were you, I wouldn't do anything for this woman.

Oh, have you sent the letter yet? Could you still put something in about the reason she wasn't able to care for Charlie wasn't the injury itself but the resulting court case? Because in that case she probably won't use it at all and will leave you alone.

on 2005-11-04 01:33 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
Well "unable to consistently care for Charlie" seems to imply health related (or whatever) problems prevented her from doing so.

I agree that if the reason you let her go was because she was taking Charlie to court--as a result of a lawsuit she filed VOLUNTARILY filed--that you should be more specific, ie that you let her go because you didnt think it was appropriate that she took him to Court with her, etc. That would be equivalent to, say, you letting her go because she took him to (insert random other place here) all the time, and you wanted a sitter who would care for him at home (or wherever you prefer).

I'm in paralegal school in Cali, and here at least you dont have to have things like that notarized--not motions signed by lawyers, not declarations done by plaintiffs, etc. So I wouldnt fret about it, your signature is enough and I dont think judges are such great beasts that they would force the issue. *shrugs*

on 2005-11-03 05:24 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
Yep, thats what I would say. She gave you nothing but grief, and her dragging your son to court all the time certainly isnt caring for him. I wouldnt do a nice thing for the girl.

Im mean.

on 2005-11-03 06:32 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
I don't know if I'm fourthing or fifthing here, but I totally agree. You've given this emotional drainer enough, and it's time for her to move on to another warm body for her leeching needs.

I would have called the cops to come and get her after curfew!

on 2005-11-03 06:39 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
OMG, I can't believe this woman is still contacting you. I suppose the letter is true, in a roundabout way, considering that you could have been baldly honest and said 'she became more unreliable than ever and was only interested in how much money she could squeeze out of me before I said 'Enough!'". Heh. As has been said before, I doubt the letter will hold that much weight with a judge. And if she gives you some crap about you getting it notarized, tell her to feck off.

on 2005-11-03 06:58 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
While I'm not an attorney, nor do I play one on TV, it might be prudent to redact her name from your LJ post. Just sayin' is all....

on 2005-11-03 06:59 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
Oops. Good point!

on 2005-11-03 10:45 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
Ha! I guessed right! I can't believe the nerve she has, contacting you and asking for more after all you put up with. At least she wasn't asking for money.

Also very nervey to take her kid trick-or-treating at your house after having been fired. But it sounds like she's not particularly bright/tactful anyhow.

on 2005-11-04 03:27 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
You know, I just knew it was her.

Argh! Just when you think she's gone, she turns up again.

on 2005-11-04 04:05 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
I don't know how I missed your last post. :(

I'll say this for crazy babysitter, she has balls. You've handled it beautifully.


charliesmum: (Default)

May 2017

 123 456

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 19th, 2017 09:40 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios